Freelance Photographer Copyrights

[aegise]

alright, look at it this way,

now your work has been given a value. It is published which means, you have a recognition given to your work (though not directly and loudly) but still be happy.

in the future, just my suggestion, you may like to include certain clauses into you agreement/quotation and please, always have a official quotation signed.

e.g Media usage right where permission is required to be obtained from the photographer for advertising/mass publication purposed.

and always state the rights that you are giving them. this is especially important when it comes to advertising photography.

in this case, you may be commissioned to take the photos but you did not give them the rights to sell or advertise the photos. the rights can be given in form of written permission or listed in the agreement.

[Just a suggestion, maybe anyone with better legal knowledge can help to rectify any mistakes. =)]

 

[jackzhangxiao]

if the photographer signed an agreement with the couple to retain his rights
how does it help since is the mua / wedding planner used the pic for advert?

i am sure no photographer would ask the the mua/planner to sign an agreement to retain his rights. since the photographer is hire directly by the couple i assume in this case.

so TS:
how does the mua/planner have a copy of your photos?

the MUA got the photos from couple and also never told the couple the purpose of getting these photos.

alright, look at it this way,

now your work has been given a value. It is published which means, you have a recognition given to your work (though not directly and loudly) but still be happy.

in the future, just my suggestion, you may like to include certain clauses into you agreement/quotation and please, always have a official quotation signed.

e.g Media usage right where permission is required to be obtained from the photographer for advertising/mass publication purposed.

and always state the rights that you are giving them. this is especially important when it comes to advertising photography.

in this case, you may be commissioned to take the photos but you did not give them the rights to sell or advertise the photos. the rights can be given in form of written permission or listed in the agreement.

[Just a suggestion, maybe anyone with better legal knowledge can help to rectify any mistakes. =)]

Thx. i am wondering if there is a sample black and white agreement for those people like me, has no knowledge to write a proper agreement?

 

[aegise]

the MUA got the photos from couple and also never told the couple the purpose of getting these photos.

well, with the signed agreement and if the usage rights clearly stated, u can write to the couple to enquire if they have given the permission? - this is to have a B&W record. in the eye of the law, every record of transact counts. if the couple said yes, they you deal with them. If they said no, note that it is still their right to distribute the photos unless it is clearly stated in the agreement they cannot (which will most probably cost you the job during the bidding) then you can write in to the advertiser, in this case, the MUA/wedding planner, that they have not acquire a written permission or paid any fee for using your photo which is bind by agreement with the couple for their advertising purpose.

It is a little tricky and if will mostly probably not worth the money you are going to spend if you are to fight the case unless you are having a track record sheet of high earnings from photography job (and you have paid the due tax).

My suggestion is to work something out with them, like a small fee for the media usage or future collaboration. Future collaboration should be pretty easy since they have already given recognition to your work and it all drills down to you marketing skill now.

Thx. i am wondering if there is a sample black and white agreement for those people like me, has no knowledge to write a proper agreement?

If you can afford, get a lawyer to write. Or if you have friends who are practicing law, just get them to write something simple for you. Just make sure you buy them a nice meal or pay them a fee.

Alternatively, there are a lot of sample available online, just do a search. You will probably need to rewrite them into your context.

Actually, any simple agreement will do it as long as the agreement and condition is clearly stated. The fee stated only covers what and what does it not cover. Simple itemised agreement will the job also. Of cos, a nicely done up agreement or the powerful usage of English, looks more professional.

Remember, most important, their name, signature, NIRC and Address needs to be stated in the agreement for it to take effect. Otherwise, it can be just any tom, dick and harry. =)

Cheers

 

[marios_pittas]

I think in this case, you should tell the couple demanding the MUA for why do they appear on the magazine without their knowledge. For an individual whose image, artwork, works of creation, appearing on publications without that individual's permission, he/she have the rights to press charges against the author, publisher or whoever uses that individual's image, artwork or works of creation. And since you took the photos and concerns of the couple, the 3 of you shold meet go and ask the MUA. Face to face and out of court settlement is always the course of way.

Hope a meeting between 3 parties will help.

Cheers,
Jack also

Taking out the "demanding" in the first sentence of the above, I would agree. I feel the best thing to do is to talk to the couple, get them on your side, and suggest a meeting with the magazine. As per Jack: "Face to face and out of court settlement is always the course of way." :thumbsup: Then again I am not a lawyer so if you have any friends who are lawyers, maybe you should talk to them over lunch?

-- marios

 

[sjackal]

Jack, actually it does seems that you have a right to stop the usage of those pics in the magazine. The photos are created for the couple's personal purposes.

But the MUA used it otherwise. It seems that there is a breach of Sec 30(5) Cap 63 http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/

Commissioning: If a portrait/photograph/engraving is commissioned by another party, the commissioner owns the copyright in the work. If the portrait/photograph/engraving is required for a particular purpose, this purpose must be communicated to the commissioned party. While the commissioner is the copyright owner, the commissioned party has the right to stop others from doing any act comprised in the copyright, unless such act is done for the particular purpose for which the portrait/photograph/engraving is created.

http://www.ipos.gov.sg/leftNav/cop/Ownership+and+Rights.htm

 

[chrissooimages]

Hello all,

I recently came back to Singapore from the US. In the US the Copyright is also generally retained by the photog. Unless the work is commissioned in which it is a language issue.

Commissioned work would usually define the purpose of the work. In which case if the work is commissioned for a wedding album or for the purpose of keepsake/archival. That is what the work is for.

Reading the IPO website.

http://www.ipos.gov.sg/leftNav/cop/Ownership+and+Rights.htm

Generally, the person who created the work (i.e. the author) owns the copyright in the work. However, there are exceptions to this general rule. Some exceptions are:

Unless:

Under Employment or Commissioning in which the copyrights belong to the entity that is paying for it. As with employment or commissioning, there would have to be a contract written up. ie. Terms of employment, your rights, etc. Commissioning also would need a contract in writing.

This clause taken from: (defining commissioning)

http://www.ipos.gov.sg/topNav/prg/bus/Inventors+Creators+and+Owners.htm

If someone had commissioned a work to be done (for example paid a fee for a photograph, or a drawing of a portrait) then generally, the commissioner would own the work. But do note this important point - if the work was intended for a specific purpose, it must be communicated to the person being commissioned to do the work. He/she is entitled to prevent the owner from using the work for any other purpose apart from the specific purpose.

At this point if you had a verbal agreement with the folks that. So the question I would be asking myself is was there really a commission of your work. If its yes because they paid you then the next question would be, was it used for a specific intended purpose. If there was profit being made from that work. ie. Advertisement. It becomes a different ball game.

I'd say send an invoice. Never hurts to try. But ultimately, have things in black and white.

I had a slightly different incident. I took a photo for a friend who was selling his house. He put it online. Sold the house 2 years later the house was up for sale. A real estate agent decided to use the same photo. I sent him an invoice for US$1500.00. He blew me off, I took the real estate agent to court. Got them to pay US$1500.00 and my attorney's fees.

But that's in the US.

Sorry for being long winded. We should be out taking photos then worrying about all this.

Chris

 

[Agetan]

One thing you need to consider is that under ACRA is that, if you are "actively" doing the commercial work that you do but do not registered under ACRA. Any agreement or contract will not hold in court in sg.

I just learn that from my partner, so I thought it will benefit some when doing work under "freelance".

Hope it helps.

Regards,

Hart

 

[watchthewaves]

I can understand if you are in business and didn't register your business, you could be in breach of some law. But that that could lead to your agreements being unenforceable? Before you pass on such "advice", perhaps you should ask your partner where he got that from and mention that too? :think:

 

[Chris Lim]

not too long back, a few images of mine and another photographer were published on a high end magazine and featured on a wedding planner's website. When equired upon, it was found out that the planner had approached the couple direct to ask for these images. No credits was given on the site and magazine neither was there permission sort.

It was a clear case of copy right infringement as there were contracts signed protecting the rights of the photographer(s). However at the end of the day, we decided not to pursue the matter. Reason being, the time, money and effort put into pursing the matter would probably not be worth it. So at the end of the day, we just let it slip by. And take it as a lesson learned to make sure the clients are briefed throughly in future about the rights before they sign the contract.

So just let it go. Next time just be abit smarter before taking up any jobs.

 

[catchlights]

I can understand if you are in business and didn't register your business, you could be in breach of some law. But that that could lead to your agreements being unenforceable? Before you pass on such "advice", perhaps you should ask your partner where he got that from and mention that too? :think:

AFAIK, all contracts must abide to local law before it has it legal status.

2. Will ACRA penalize me if I fail to register my current activity as a business?
A person must register a business with ACRA before carrying on a business in Singapore unless the activity does not come within the definition of a business. Failure to register a business is an offence punishable with a fine up to $5,000, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both. Furthermore, it will also result in the rights under any contract being unenforceable by the person who did not register, unless that person applies to the court for relief or permission to enforce such rights.

6. I am providing freelance services.Do I need to register my activity as a business?
Any activity that is carried out on a continuity basis for the purpose of gain is required to be registered with ACRA.

 

[Fallenphoenix]

AFAIK, all contracts must abide to local law before it has it legal status.

just curious...

Is there a need to register with ACRA if I'm just a casual part-time freelance photographer? Say 1-4 jobs per yr, or none at all. Is it still illegal not to register?

 

[watchthewaves]

AFAIK, all contracts must abide to local law before it has it legal status.

For those in business, as well as well-meaning forummers dispensing advice, when it comes down to legal rights and obligations, it would be wise to check for the basis/rationale of anything said rather than just rely simply on "someone told me" or "AFAIK".

For those interested in basic info on contracts, this might help:
http://www.singaporelaw.sg/content/ContractLaw.html

It may appear heavy reading, but if you are in business, you can't avoid contracts. Surely you'd want to know what's it about, right?

As a quick run through of the info there, have a look at offer, acceptance and consideration for the basic elements of a contract. And search for void, voidable, enforce/enforcement on whether a contract is valid or can be enforced.

 

[Agetan]

What you have given is nothing more than the basic of contract law in Singapore.

ACRA governs anything about business, hence to have a business bearing type of contract legality it is better to refer to ACRA website which Benjamin (Catchlight) has quoted the relevant point that I have mentioned.

Contract law and its legality changes all the time and it will depend on which aspect that you are looking for, it is not a straight forward process.

It is just a basic to understand that every cent that you earn, the government will want a cut from it. After all, if it is an income, you should declare it if you want to play by the rule.

Dealing under table, skewing the law is not something you want to do if you are running a business as you will need to sleep well at night.

If you take your business seriously and want to grow it, it is a foolish act to ignore or even skewing the legal aspect.

Regards,

Hart

 

[watchthewaves]

Yes, that was a link to basic contract law. Because from your earlier post, you don't seem to have understood the basics (no offence intended).

I completely agree with you that if someone is running a business, he should ensure that he does everything legally and above board. If he were to breach any law in the running of his business, if the authorities come after him, he will have to face the consequences. But the validity of a contract he signs is separate from any breaches of any business law or regulation.

You earlier posted that "... if you are "actively" doing the commercial work that you do but do not registered under ACRA. Any agreement or contract will not hold in court in sg." So if a photog signs a written contract and does the work, but failed to register his business with ACRA, you are saying that the person who contracted him can refuse to pay the photog and the photog can do nothing about it? If you are unable to substantiate this, you should not make such a statement.

Peace.

 

[hori]

An old thread where I post up an URL related to photographer's rights

 

[zakariazainal]

thanks for posting up the previous thread. just as valuable the discussion there as it is here.